AFLW Port Adelaide, Essendon, Hawthorn and Sydney Swans - AFLW expansion, teams 15-18

[Teen Wolf]

They may hold off expanding the AFLW until Tassie gets their own AFL/AFLW teams, either as a 19th franchise or the relocation of Hawthorn/St. Kilda.

I thought Tasmania already has its own AFLW team.

Whenever they do expand I’d imagine it would be 2 at a time instead of all 4 in 1 go (probs the interstate non vic sides first)

We can all imagine anything, the next step would be to express some reasoning for an idea becoming a reality.

 

[eastfreo75]

This is my solution for what needs to be done to have a reasonably even 17-team competition in 2023.

FREE AGENCY
All players born before 1 Jan 1996 can choose to stay at their club or go to Port Adelaide/Essendon/Hawthorn as free-agent expansion signings. Via this mechanism, the new expansion teams can sign 3 players each, the Adelaide Crows can lose up to 2 players and the seven existing Melbourne-based teams can lose one player each.

No compensation should be given, hence the "free" part of free agency.


MANDATORY DELISTING AND RE-DRAFT

Port Adelaide
Adelaide-listed players born after 31 Dec 1995 are split into two groups by Port’s football department. For example…

Group 1: Marinoff, S.Allan, Ponter, Gore, Button, Martin, McKinnon, Biddell, Crows 2021 1st pick
Group 2: Hatchard, Scheer, Jones, Charlton, Gould, Woodland, Munyard, Newman, Crows 2021 2nd pick

Adelaide then choose which one of the groups they get to keep, and the other players are effectively delisted and drafted to Port Adelaide. Crows officials and supporters will complain, throwing around scary words like "raided", but the reality is that's what needs to be done to ensure the SA talent is spread evenly across the two teams.

Essendon
A similar process should be followed in Essendon's case, with slight alterations. The Bombers take 16 Carlton players born after 31 Dec 1995 and split
them into four groups of four. Carlton then chooses the 3 groups they keep, the other group goes to Essendon. The Bombers do the same for the Western Bulldogs and North Melbourne players too.

Hawthorn
Hawthorn would then do the same for Melbourne and Collingwood players. However, for Richmond (and St Kilda), the Hawks would divide the 16 players into 8 pairs. The Tigers (and Saints) would choose the 7 pairs they get to keep, and Hawthorn gets the other pair. This discrepancy is to correct for Richmond's (and St Kilda's) list not being as strong as the other Melbourne-based clubs, a result of the previous expansion screw-up.

West Coast
The re-draft shouldn't just stop there. The AFL needs to correct the uneven spread of talent in other states too. West Coast should also take 4 players from Fremantle via the same method. The fact that we see role players like Hayley Miller and Stephanie Cain, two very similar footballers with different hair, on one team while the cross-town rival is crying out for more experienced talent of their ilk is shameful.

Gold Coast
The Gold Coast Suns also need to take a minimum of 4 more decent players from the Brisbane Lions in order to better spread the Queensland talent, however this is more difficult to justify because of geographical factors. It's true that some players are already forced to move cities to play AFLW; the question is to what degree this can be pushed. I would suggest certain Brisbane players can gain an exemption from this re-draft if the AFL deems they have a good enough (probably work-related) reason.

Geelong
Ideally, the better spread of talent across all other teams will help Geelong catch up to the field. But the Cats feel the need to do things like trade away pick no.5 in the draft for basically nothing in return, just because Vic Metro players want to play for a Melbourne-based club. I don't like that and the AFL should still make a priority of disincentivising it (topic for another thread though).


RATIONALE

Is it fair to force players to move clubs?
Yes! We have things like a standard draft and a salary cap for a reason. And those measures are just for addressing normal imbalances in team competitiveness. The current AFLW situation is very abnormal, so much more needs to be done to ensure all expansion teams are set up on an even playing field.

If the rules (which allow extraordinary measures to be taken in the name of equalisation) aren't written for this situation, then what are they written for?

Why should players born before 1996 be exempt from the re-draft?
For starters: there's an optics issue, particularly around gender equality, which the AFL would be concerned with. Forcing older semi-professional female players to move clubs is not a good look when you have extremely well-paid 28-year-olds in the men's competition picking and choosing where they play.

Secondly, the older players are obviously the leaders who essentially define a team's identity. The idea is to setup the expansion teams as solidly as possible without disturbing the fabric of existing teams, hence the need to limit the movement of those particular players.

Should there be other players exempt from the re-draft?
Provisions should also be made which account for exceptional draft rules that already exist, such as Tasmanian-based players and father-daughter selections. But I'm just trying to communicate the core concept for now.

What about the AFL's rejected points system?
My system is better. The biggest problem with the AFL's proposal was that the quality of each player would be judged by the All-Australian selection panel. Way too much power for people who aren't even capable of satisfactorily performing their easier primary role.

In my club-by-club delisting/re-drafting process, that untrustworthy intermediate third-party is removed. It gives the football departments of each club greater control of their destiny, and it still asks clubs (whether existing or expansion) to make competent list management decisions.

Why not 2022?
In many ways I think it would be much better to add Port, Essendon and Hawthorn next year. But I don't see it on the cards yet because 1) the final year of the CBA would have to be renegotiated (and some playing contracts might have to be torn up); and 2) 2021 would have to play out in a stable fashion--despite our hopes, it's too early to tell if that's going to happen.

You are misunderstanding the WA situation.

Fremantle will need delist players who will go straight into West Coast best 20.

Morrison will force her way into the Dockers best 20 player and somebody will crossover to the Eagles to get a game.

West Coast will get Franklin and Roberts in the next 2 drafts who are guns.

West Coast could get back Randall.

With Only 2 teams both WA teams will get stronger vs Victoria with 8 teams. Will get worse if Essendon and Hawthorn come in.

 

[Teen Wolf]

You are misunderstanding the WA situation.

It's not a difficult situation to understand. Putting your club allegiance aside and advocating for initiatives that are in the best interests of the whole league, however, is certainly a concept that a lot of people struggle with.

Fremantle will need delist players who will go straight into West Coast best 20.

West Coast don't need more players who aren't good enough to get a game for Fremantle. They need more players who are good enough to get a game for Fremantle.

West Coast will get Franklin and Roberts in the next 2 drafts who are guns.

They would still be getting the 1st/3rd/5th etc pick in the WA draft if they were just a little bit weaker than Fremantle. Given that they are a hell of a lot weaker than Fremantle, a hell of a lot more needs to be done to ensure a fair spread of talent.

West Coast could get back Randall.

Even if they could manage to recruit Randall in the future, why would they? It would mean giving up high draft picks, and you just finished implying those are too important for West Coast to give away.

With Only 2 teams both WA teams will get stronger vs Victoria with 8 teams.

You are misunderstanding the situation in Victoria (which is much more complex than WA's). Lumping in Geelong with the Melbourne-based teams reveals that.

Will get worse if Essendon and Hawthorn come in.

There is no "if". Essendon and Hawthorn are, at most, 3-4 years away from joining. The key question is what will be done about the distribution of talent in each state by then. Without knowing the answer to that, you can't credibly predict the strength of any team.

 

[eastfreo75]

It's not a difficult situation to understand. Putting your club allegiance aside and advocating for initiatives that are in the best interests of the whole league, however, is certainly a concept that a lot of people struggle with.


West Coast don't need more players who aren't good enough to get a game for Fremantle. They need more players who are good enough to get a game for Fremantle.


They would still be getting the 1st/3rd/5th etc pick in the WA draft if they were just a little bit weaker than Fremantle. Given that they are a hell of a lot weaker than Fremantle, a hell of a lot more needs to be done to ensure a fair spread of talent.


Even if they could manage to recruit Randall in the future, why would they? It would mean giving up high draft picks, and you just finished implying those are too important for West Coast to give away.


You are misunderstanding the situation in Victoria (which is much more complex than WA's). Lumping in Geelong with the Melbourne-based teams reveals that.


There is no "if". Essendon and Hawthorn are, at most, 3-4 years away from joining. The key question is what will be done about the distribution of talent in each state by then. Without knowing the answer to that, you can't credibly predict the strength of any team.

West Coasts best 10 odd players are pretty good but they lack depth.

Bring in 3 or 4 delisted dockers that are a top 4 team will make them more competitive.

They lack goal kickers and Franklin and Roberts are the answer. Both a way better than the rest of the WA draft girls. The fact that you won’t know those girls makes me think that you don’t understand WA footy.

Sure they won’t be a finals team next year but they will improve a lot.

 

[Teen Wolf]

Bring in 3 or 4 delisted dockers that are a top 4 team will make them more competitive.

So just copy the Suns' list strategy, because that's working wonders.

One of those delisted Dockers would be Tarnee Tester, who West Coast have already delisted themselves. Bit of a flaw in your plan there.

The fact that you won’t know those girls makes me think that you don’t understand WA footy.

Well here's what your understanding of WA footy looks like, from 16th Feb 2020:

Got a feeling that they will get Randall next year, which will be a massive signing.

They could poach another 2-3 dockers as well and West Coast next year will be a lot more competitive.

Wrong and wrong and wrong. So I don't give a s**t about what you think.

 

[Teen Wolf]

Yesterday's article in the Age didn't really say anything new:

With no word from the AFL on their stated ambition to have all 18 teams in the league by 2023, it remains to be seen whether the new arrivals will be granted time to catch their breath.

Essendon chief executive Xavier Campbell says the Bombers are ready to revive Windy Hill as a home ground for an AFLW team.

"We're awaiting the decision by the AFL. We encourage them to be bold, grow the game and commit to expansion that can only add value to the competition," Campbell said.

"We make no secret we are ready to pursue an AFLW licence no later than next year. With likely the best women's football facilities in the country, we're ready for entry into this competition."

Port Adelaide chief executive Matthew Richardson said they are keen to be involved.

"Port Adelaide is excited by the growth of women's football in South Australia, a second licence here is important to expand the talent opportunities and pathway to the elite level," he said.

"We have a working group and business model in place and are committed to securing an AFLW licence at the next available opportunity."

On Port, I missed this line from one of their redevelopment articles during the past month (a follow-up was published a week later):

Port Adelaide is aiming to enter the AFLW competition by 2023, so the upgrade of the precinct is strategically important to ensure it is ready for this expansion.

The thing about a 2023 expansion is that the AFL would have to set the wheels in motion within the next few months, assuming teams will be required to submit bids again (or for the first time, in Port's case).

They could stall/play it safe a bit by granting provisional licences in ~September and pushing back next year's sign-and-trade period closer to the draft. Nevertheless, if the AFL aren't interested in adding teams for '23, we should know about it pretty soon.

 

[TheTassieHawk]

Teen Wolf

I agree with most of your arguments and rationale, I think the only suggestion would be to have a few tweaks about how the groups of players are split in regards to age, games played, position etc.

ie port can’t split Adelaides squad into under 23 and under 23 groups then force them to choose which to keep.

Other than that achieving relatively even teams in WA, SA and QLD to start with should adress any underlying competitive comp wide balance issues with expansion to 10 teams in Victoria (with 9 in Melbourne).

In reality though I can’t see much likelihood or significant changes being accepted by a majority of the current clubs due to their self interest.

 

[TheTassieHawk]

As for when expansion will occur I think 2023 will be off the table unless the announcement is made prior to the end of July this year with 2024 or 2025 much more likely.

Current clubs would certainly appreciate knowing prior to this years trade, delist, draft period about any 2023 expansion as it shapes their planning and strategy.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

The league is too big. It should have been a stand alone league with 11 teams, playing curtain raisers and closers to the men's league.
6 teams in Victoria covering Geelong (and districts), east, south east, Western, Northern suburbs, Gippsland
Teams in WA, SA, NSW, QLD, TAS

INSTEAD THE Afl wanted to keep the brand in the spotlight during the off-season whilst forcing the cost onto the clubs, rather than taking the hit themselves to actually develop the women's game

 

[Teen Wolf]

As for when expansion will occur I think 2023 will be off the table unless the announcement is made prior to the end of July this year with 2024 or 2025 much more likely.

Which announcement? The one that asks for licence submissions, or the one that reveals who's joining next and when? The former would probably have to happen well before July, but I don't see why the latter would need to occur sooner than the last time (September).

Current clubs would certainly appreciate knowing prior to this years trade, delist, draft period about any 2023 expansion as it shapes their planning and strategy.

They would appreciate it, but there isn't going to be proper clarity for them until a CBA for 2023 gets done anyway.

The league is too big. It should have been a stand alone league with 11 teams, playing curtain raisers and closers to the men's league.
6 teams in Victoria covering Geelong (and districts), east, south east, Western, Northern suburbs, Gippsland
Teams in WA, SA, NSW, QLD, TAS

INSTEAD THE Afl wanted to keep the brand in the spotlight during the off-season whilst forcing the cost onto the clubs, rather than taking the hit themselves to actually develop the women's game

Well the AFL covers the player salaries and operating costs. Governments have handed out funding like candy. Sponsors have jumped on board in droves. And the clubs weren't forced to apply for licences--they were falling over themselves to get a team (even the slowpokes eventually), I wonder why.

So it looks like your knowledge of this topic is tremendously ignorant (if you're not familiar with that word, it's used to describe somebody who has no idea what they're talking about, doesn't imply they're a bad person) and I'm sorry to say it renders your robustly expressed opinion utterly worthless.

 

[Teen Wolf]

On the same weekend the Adelaide Crows claimed their second minor premiership in three years, South Australia defeated Western Australia in the AFLW U19s. If results continue down this path in both competitions over the next few weeks (SA v QLD particularly shaping up as one to watch), you can betcha bottom dollar the addition of Port Adelaide will become the hottest talking point in the world of women's footy.

Immediately after the Crows' grand final win in 2019, the hysteria around their NT connection reached fever pitch. At the time I rightly dismissed it as a red herring (note how access to NT players has indistinguishably helped the Suns), and the partnership ended soon after. I believe it when the concerned parties say it was a mutual decision. Nevertheless, I also believe the AFL--in an attempt to appease the other disgruntled clubs--would've ensured it happened even if Adelaide/NT had something different in mind.

Granting licences is a much less frivolous matter, hence the pressure to weaken the SA juggernaut will be even greater. Of course, those paying attention would know Adelaide have certainly not been a juggernaut this year. The five fellow finalists are just as competitive, similarly benefitting from enlisting disproportionate amounts of talent from their respective states. On the other hand: optics.

 

[The Flying Belgian]

I don't think it's as simplistic as talent = success. Coaching, development and player identification are equally as important and how do you redistribute that?

I can only look with any great clarity at my own club, but despite a huge player turnover over previous years, we still are contending. When you list out the players who have departed to other clubs recently it's quite startling.

Gold Coast: Yorston, Kaslar, Virgo, Groves-Little, Bella, Parker, Pittman
Carlton: Harris
Richmond: Frederick
St Kilda: McCarthy, Exon
North Melbourne: Gibson*, Ashmore, Randall, Stanton (now GC)
West Coast: Dowrick*

* - didn't play in 2021 but were still listed..

I don't have problem with players moving clubs to further opportunity or moving back to their home state for family reasons. But at the risk of being selfish I think we've done our part. Admittedly, there are some high-profile players on that list we probably weren't all that upset to lose, but it's still a talent void to fill. Yorston (who didn't play in 2021 due to injury) is one that will sting for a while I suspect - she was a local junior who left to be coached by David Lake, as did a few of the others. And that list doesn't even include Kalinda Howarth who was on our list a few years back and Hildebrand who went to Collingwood but is no longer playing.

When people talk about the Lions as having a disproportionate amount of talent in our state I don't think they know exactly what they're talking about. But we only have two players from Gold Coast's zone on our list, one was delisted by the Suns and one was delisted by us, then resigned a few years later.

So, why have we been able to stay relatively competitive? I think it's more to do with the off-field set-up than anything. This year, we are an even team without a standout star who we rely on, unlike many other teams.

I know the current mens models punishes success in general, but until the women turn professional a lot the stuff talked about here is just moot. I mean I'd love to see players like Katie Brennan and Tahlia Randall come back home to play in Qld and maybe help the Suns out, but they've chosen where they want to live. And until these women are paid accordingly, you can't force them to do anything.

Time will have to take it's course until we see a natural improvement from those teams who are younger. If anything, the girls coming through now who've been exposed to development programs will go past the established players in the coming years, so the change bay be swifter than one might think anyway.

As for Port Adelaide and Sydney, I think the AFL takes the view that having more players at the highest level is better from a developmental POV, rather than worrying so much about an even, competitive league. That said, this season has probably been the most even so far, particularly at the top.

 

[Teen Wolf]

I don't think it's as simplistic as talent = success. Coaching, development and player identification are equally as important and how do you redistribute that?

When people talk about the Lions as having a disproportionate amount of talent in our state I don't think they know exactly what they're talking about. But we only have two players from Gold Coast's zone on our list, one was delisted by the Suns and one was delisted by us, then resigned a few years later.

So, why have we been able to stay relatively competitive? I think it's more to do with the off-field set-up than anything. This year, we are an even team without a standout star who we rely on, unlike many other teams.

Brisbane have star players on every line. Those who try to suggest otherwise are the people who don't know what they're talking about. And I'm not just saying that now because they're 7-2 and second on the ladder.

Frequent readers of this board might remember I evaluated the strength of every list before the 2020 season and approximated Brisbane had four-times the amount of top-quality players that GC did. The Lions went on to win five-times as many games as the Suns in the following two H&A seasons. I don't claim success purely comes down to the playing list, I'll settle for four fifths.

I know the current mens models punishes success in general, but until the women turn professional a lot the stuff talked about here is just moot. I mean I'd love to see players like Katie Brennan and Tahlia Randall come back home to play in Qld and maybe help the Suns out, but they've chosen where they want to live. And until these women are paid accordingly, you can't force them to do anything.

No suggestion about forcing players to move interstate has been made in this thread.

 

[TheTassieHawk]

Which announcement? The one that asks for licence submissions, or the one that reveals who's joining next and when? The former would probably have to happen well before July, but I don't see why the latter would need to occur sooner than the last time (September).


They would appreciate it, but there isn't going to be proper clarity for them until a CBA for 2023 gets done anyway.


Well the AFL covers the player salaries and operating costs. Governments have handed out funding like candy. Sponsors have jumped on board in droves. And the clubs weren't forced to apply for licences--they were falling over themselves to get a team (even the slowpokes eventually), I wonder why.

So it looks like your knowledge of this topic is tremendously ignorant (if you're not familiar with that word, it's used to describe somebody who has no idea what they're talking about, doesn't imply they're a bad person) and I'm sorry to say it renders your robustly expressed opinion utterly worthless.

My post wasn’t clear about whether announcements would be regarding bids themselves or successful ones and thanks for pointing that out as I hadn’t layed it out in detail and won’t bother too now.

Suffice to say I hope that the AFL provides clarity after the May meeting about whether expansion is in play for 2022, 2023 or later.

 

[MooreTreloar]

If they’re introducing two teams at a time I think Port Adelaide needs to be in the first round of two, then one of .Sydney, Hawthorn or Essendon. And the remaining two the following year. Though that’s just my opinion.

 

[OnlyPowerForever]

Whilst I'm all for getting Port Adelaide into the AFLW asap, I'm also conscious that we didn't give it due attention the initial time around and as such deserve no favours.
A 3rd Crows premiership might work in our favour of course.

 

[Scratchy05]

Here is how I see it personally. I think we need to go to an 18 team comp by next season. The main reasons for this are

1.As Bec Goddard said on the front bar. Every club needs to have a stake in the league so all the clubs are invested in the competition.
2. People who support another club not in AFLW wont watch it. For an example, my girlfriends family are Essendon fans and are big fans of womens sport following both Cricket and Soccer and they follow footy more than all of those sports. But they dont watch womens footy. Purely because if you have been lets say an Essendon supporter your whole life, why would you follow Collingwood in the AFLW. It doesn'tmake sense. This way, you can get people who would potentially be interested in watching AFLW actually watching it as they have their team to barrack for.

Now I do see the argument that you would be diluting the talent pool even further which is very fair. However more people playing will fast track the development for the future, even if it does come at the expense of the current talent, the comp will be in a stronger position in 10 years.

And in another note, Victoria has probably the 2 best junior prospects footy has seen in Rowbottom and Prespakis this year. Introducing both Essendon and Hawthorn allows them each to have one of these girls.

 

[Munga]

And in another note, Victoria has probably the 2 best junior prospects footy has seen in Rowbottom and Prespakis this year. Introducing both Essendon and Hawthorn allows them each to have one of these girls.

As a hurting Saints supporter who's looking forward to the draft, get stuffed!!! Haha

 

[Scratchy05]

As a hurting Saints supporter who's looking forward to the draft, get stuffed!!! Haha

Yeah that is my big concern how some of already the lowly vic teams may struggle. What I'd suggest is to give you guys more protection when it comes to losing players. Maybe make it that where you finished on the ladder is how many players you can protect in your team. For an example, Collingwood get to only protect 3, Melbourne 4, North Melbourne 6, Carlton 7, Western Bulldogs 8, Richmond 10, St Kilda 11 & Geelong 13.

After the first player is taken, the club who lost the player gets to protect a further 5 or 10 players (not sure on the right number). So for an example, if I were Collingwood, I'd protect Schleicher, Molloy and Bonnici. Then Essendon or Hawthorn get a pick of any one of our players. After they presumably select Davey and then I get to protect 5 more players

 

[mpal6]

AFLW Latest News - AFL.com.au/aflw

Latest breaking AFLW news from the official website of the Australian Football League.

womens.afl

After losing 16 over the last 2-3 years, our Coach is loud and clear on where he stands

 

[mpal6]

Brisbane have star players on every line. Those who try to suggest otherwise are the people who don't know what they're talking about. And I'm not just saying that now because they're 7-2 and second on the ladder.

Frequent readers of this board might remember I evaluated the strength of every list before the 2020 season and approximated Brisbane had four-times the amount of top-quality players that GC did.

I'm very interested in that post. 2019-20 is the year when we started finding more players to fill the gaps. I'd be really surprised if you've already rated some to "star" quality. If anything, all commentary reviews even up to grand final said star power is the main thing we don't have and its a very even team.

 

[Teen Wolf]

I'm very interested in that post. 2019-20 is the year when we started finding more players to fill the gaps. I'd be really surprised if you've already rated some to "star" quality. If anything, all commentary reviews even up to grand final said star power is the main thing we don't have and its a very even team.

The starting point would be the end of the last post of my Disposal Impact thread, which was the basis for my pre-2020 MVP rankings (featuring 4 Lions in the top 25, more than any other club).

I've never rated any gap-fillers as star players and never will. But as for players like Davidson, Hodder and Dawes (who are stars, or at least stars in the making, for which teams are built around), they hadn't played a game before 2020 and thus I hadn't rated them at all.

Certainly the commentary regarding Brisbane has been that they lack star power. If such poppycock punditry didn't bother me, I wouldn't have bothered with crafting laborious threads like those two linked examples.

 

[Munga]

Yeah that is my big concern how some of already the lowly vic teams may struggle. What I'd suggest is to give you guys more protection when it comes to losing players. Maybe make it that where you finished on the ladder is how many players you can protect in your team. For an example, Collingwood get to only protect 3, Melbourne 4, North Melbourne 6, Carlton 7, Western Bulldogs 8, Richmond 10, St Kilda 11 & Geelong 13.

After the first player is taken, the club who lost the player gets to protect a further 5 or 10 players (not sure on the right number). So for an example, if I were Collingwood, I'd protect Schleicher, Molloy and Bonnici. Then Essendon or Hawthorn get a pick of any one of our players. After they presumably select Davey and then I get to protect 5 more players

This deserves some serious consideration! That's seems like an excellent idea Scratchy, and protecting another 5 after you've lost one looks a fair number. With Collingwood this year for example, they keep 3, lose 1, keep 5, this would then mean their 10th best player would be up for grabs... while Carlton and Bulldogs would, in theory, have their 8th and 9th player available respectively, so the Pies could still be protected there for a few more picks.

Furthermore, I'd even consider all the top 3 teams protecting 3 players. Otherwise if the club finishing top can only protect one player before losing their second best, I think the fans would riot haha. We can't rip the souls out of clubs, so many kids already have their idols.

 

[Scratchy05]

This deserves some serious consideration! That's seems like an excellent idea Scratchy, and protecting another 5 after you've lost one looks a fair number. With Collingwood this year for example, they keep 3, lose 1, keep 5, this would then mean their 10th best player would be up for grabs... while Carlton and Bulldogs would, in theory, have their 8th and 9th player available respectively, so the Pies could still be protected there for a few more picks.

Furthermore, I'd even consider all the top 3 teams protecting 3 players. Otherwise if the club finishing top can only protect one player before losing their second best, I think the fans would riot haha. We can't rip the souls out of clubs, so many kids already have their idols.

I unfortunately didnt consider interstate teams as the comp isn't professional as of yet, I feel it would be harsh to make girls uproot their lives to move. I guess it comes down in that situation if they actually want to move.

 

[Pusswah]

I do think that waiting til 2023 to add further teams per the OP is a good idea.
Calls to add more teams immediately I think are impetuous (and in some cases like say Kennett, self serving).

How do we deal with the gap between the best players and the worst?
To me, one of the keys of having an elite competition is maintaining a formidable minimum level of skill and fitness.
Is the talent pool deep enough to support that for 2022?
My own gut feel was that the number of teams was a little too high early on.
That gap gave those that would dismiss the competition as less than elite a leg to stand on.